WAR 04/23 to 04/30 ***The***Winds***of***WAR***

=



(6)03/22 to 03/29 ***The***Winds***of***WAR
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...nds***of***WAR

(7)03/30 to 04/06 ***The***Winds***of***WAR***
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...***of***WAR***

(8)04/07 to 04/14 ***The***Winds***of***WAR***
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...***of***WAR***

(9)04/15 to 04/22 ***The***Winds***of***WAR***
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?403021-04-15-to-04-22-***The***Winds***of***WAR***

==============





Israeli missile defence - the upper layer gets thicker

By
Arie Egozi
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/a...le-defence--the-upper-layer-gets-thicker.html

While many countries, including the US, are struggling to deploy anti-ballistic missile systems, Israel is upgrading its operational Arrow system and it will be more capable as time passes.

The Israeli Air Force's (IAF's) two operational Arrow anti-ballistic missiles interceptor batteries will soon be equipped with improved missiles.


The improved missiles have a new block of software and some more highly classified upgrades. These changes are a result of the many simulations performed by the IAF's Arrow unit.

The simulations, using the built-in capability of the batteries, is complemented by one of the main Israeli national simulators built to allow the simulation of any scenario.

Now to the upgrades. The detection and fire control capabilities of the Arrow-2 batteries will be upgraded further by connecting them to the Elta "Super Green Pine" radar.

This radar, according to the IAF, will give the Arrow-2 operators an "improved picture of the skies". And the "skies" in this context mean space far, very far, from Israel.

However, this is only part of the effort that has gained momentum in recent years in parallel with the accelerated development of Iran's long-range ballistic missiles.

Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI), the Arrow's developer and manufacturer, is currently developing the Arrow-3, a totally different interceptor that is designed for kinetic kills of ballistic missiles armed with unconventional warheads.

The improved Arrow-2, and later the Arrow-3, will be the upper layers of a multi-layered system aimed at protecting Israel from rockets and missiles.

The Rafael Iron Dome is the lowest layer, the "David's Sling" developed by Rafael and Raytheon will constitute the second layer, and the two versions of the Arrow will top that system.

There are more and more signs that there is a growing interest in the Israeli multi-layered system, and that this may result in some export deals.

South Korea is facing a problem, Japan is facing one, and other countries may also feel threatened.





=
 
=






Israel says peace treaty at
risk after Egypt scraps gas deal


CAIRO/JERUSALEM - The Associated Press
April/23/2012
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/is...deal-.aspx?pageID=238&nid=19054&NewsCatID=352

Israel's energy minister is urging Egypt to reverse its decision to stop supplying Israel with natural gas.

Uzi Landau says the canceled deal will not only exacerbate power shortages this summer but also disrupt an already shaky peace treaty between the two countries.


Egypt's national gas company announced the decision late Sunday, saying Israel had not paid its bills.

Israel gets about 40 percent of its natural gas from Egypt. In the past year, saboteurs have repeatedly blown up the pipeline, disrupting the supply to Israel.

Landau says the gas deal was a cornerstone of Israel's peace treaty with Egypt. He expects electricity shortages this summer, partly due to the lack of Egyptian gas.

Israel is ramping up production on offshore oil fields to make up for the shortage.

The head of the Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company says it has terminated its contract to ship gas to Israel because of violations of contractual obligations, a decision Israel said overshadows the peace agreement between the two countries.

The 2005 natural gas deal has become a symbol of tensions between Israel and Egypt since the uprising. For many Egyptians, it typifies the close relations the regime of deposed President Hosni Mubarak forged with Israel and how his associates benefited greatly from such business deals.

Critics charge that Israel got the gas at below-market prices and that Mubarak cronies skimmed millions of dollars off the proceeds, costing Egypt millions of dollars in lost revenue.

Egyptian militants have blown up the gas pipeline to Israel 14 times since the uprising more than a year ago.

Israel insists it is paying a fair price for the gas.

Decision 'not political'​

Mohamed Shoeb, the head of the Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company, said Sunday the decision to cancel the deal was not political.

"This has nothing to do with anything outside of the commercial relations," Shoeb told The Associated Press.

He said Israel has not paid for its gas in four months. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor denied that.

Shoeb told Egyptian TV that the decision to cancel the contract was made Thursday because "each side has rights and we are representing our rights."

On Sunday, Israel Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz said the unilateral Egyptian announcement was of "great concern" politically and economically.

"This is a dangerous precedent that overshadows the peace agreements and the peaceful atmosphere between Israel and Egypt," he said in a statement. Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty in 1979, but relations have never been warm.

The Israeli side said the decision was "unlawful and in bad faith," accusing the Egyptian side of failing to supply the gas quantities it is owed.

Israel insists it is paying a fair price for the gas. Israel's electricity company has been warning of possible power shortages this summer, partly because of the unreliability of the natural gas supply from Egypt.

For the long term, Israel is developing its own natural gas fields off its Mediterranean coast and is expected to be self-sufficient in natural gas in a few years.






=
 
=





Egypt cancels gas deal with Israel

Monday, April 23, 2012 11:59 AM
http://en.aswatmasriya.com/news/view.aspx?id=832014aa-0342-4620-bcbf-9455ba17a4f8

Egyptian energy companies, citing a trade dispute, have terminated a deal to supply Israel with natural gas in a step that may further erode bilateral ties strained by a popular revolt that toppled Egypt's pro-Israeli leader last year.

An Israeli partner in the business made the step public on Sunday but an Egyptian firm said the decision to cancel the deal had been made on Thursday.


Israel, which relies on Egypt for 40 percent of its natural gas supply, worried about facing further energy cuts after a series of sabotage attacks on the pipeline running through the volatile Sinai peninsula contributed to shortages.

Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz expressed "great concern" about the suspension, saying it had set "a dangerous precedent which casts a shadow on the peace agreements and the peaceful atmosphere between Egypt and Israel".

Egypt was the first of two Arab countries to sign a peace treaty with Israel, in 1979, followed by Jordan in 1994.

The Egyptian decision was announced in Israel by Ampal-American Israel Corporation, partner in the East Mediterranean Gas Company (EMG), which operates a cross-border pipeline supplying gas to Israel.

Ampal said the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation and Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company had told EMG they were "terminating the gas and purchase agreement".

The company gave no reasons for the Egyptian decision but said legal redress was under consideration.

"EMG considers the termination attempt unlawful and in bad faith, and consequently demanded its withdrawal," Ampal said in a written statement.

EGYPTIAN FIRM CONFIRMS DECISION​

Mohamed Shoeib, chairman of the Egyptian company EGAS, confirmed the decision, saying the 20-year-old deal with Israel had been terminated on Thursday.

Shoeib told Egypt's Hayat TV that "EGAS ended the deal because the other party didn't fulfil its commitments".

The Egyptian decision followed a dispute over damages caused by a series of blasts on the pipeline supplying Israel, via the Sinai desert region on its border where lawlessness has risen since President Hosni Mubarak's overthrow in 2011.

Explosions have caused extensive disruptions in service in the past year, and Israel has warned residents to expect electricity outages in high demand summer months, and that it needed to speed up efforts to seek alternative supply lines.

Ampal and two other companies have been seeking $8 billion in damages from Egypt for not safeguarding their investment against the pipeline blasts.

It said EMG "initiated arbitration" against EGPC and EGAS last October, accusing the Egyptian firms of a "longstanding failure to supply the gas quantities owed".

Ampal said in its statement on Sunday that in light of the cancellation, EMG, Ampal and EMG's other international shareholders were "considering their options and legal remedies as well as approaching the various governments" concerned.

Shoeib denied the decision bore any diplomatic significance.

"It is a trade dispute not a political issue," he said.

Israel had to evacuate embassy staff in Cairo after riots there in September, an incident that highlighted threats to relations, though a new ambassador has since taken up residence in the Egyptian capital.





=
 
=







Learn from history — nip it in the bud

April 23, 2012, 12:23 am 0
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/learn-from-history-nip-it-in-the-bud/

When Hitler marched the German army into the Rhineland, the Treaty of Versailles was instantly relegated to the dustbin of history. Unbeknownst to Great Britain and France was the fact that Hitler was ready to abandon the territory he had just re-militarized in a heartbeat if they took military measures of their own. The result of failing to force Hitler’s army out of the territory was — well, we all know how that ended.


Now the Egyptians have declared that they will be unilaterally cutting off supply of natural gas to Israel. In doing so they are tearing up the 1979 peace treaty that marked an end to decades of hostilities between Egypt and Israel. Anwar Sadat paid the ultimate price for making peace with Israel, and peace has served both great nations well; now we watch as the safeguards that have kept the treaty in place for decades are torn down one by one.

The cessation of the flow of gas from Egypt to Israel may be the issue at the moment, but it isn’t the first time the agreement has been broken.

The Iranian naval vessel that sailed through the Suez Canal in February marked the first taboo to be broken in the wake of Hosni Mubarak‘s ouster, and a new order has been pushing against Israel ever since.

The number of Egyptian forces that have been allowed to enter the Sinai now exceeds the number permitted in the treaty. Admittedly, at the moment this is by mutual consent between Israel and Egypt. However, 14 instances of sabotage against the gas pipeline, coupled with terror attacks launched at Israel from the now-lawless Sinai, ensure that Israel won’t raise any objections. Compounded with the increasingly aggressive stance being taken by the interim Egyptian administration, and the continued lack of security in the Sinai, the increased military presence should be cause for grave concern.


A symbol of a relationship going up in flames? A sabotaged gas pipeline burns in the Sinai earlier this month (photo credit: AP file)

The gas pipe that has just been turned off is a symbol of the relationship between Israel and Egypt: Sometimes blown up or disconnected, the relations could always be deemed OK as long as the Egyptian government made the effort to bring them back on-line. Now that this symbol is under threat, Israel needs to step up to the plate and fight to maintain the steadily slipping status quo.

Fighting to keep the gas flowing means fighting for relations to remain positive in the long term. By ignoring this attack on the peace agreement, Israel is swapping short-term stability for an eventual conflict in the desert.

Now is the time to draw the line. This is already a diplomatic crisis, regardless of how Israel’s diplomats spin it, and attempting to downplay the issue will have disastrous consequences for us all. If the government shrugs it off this time there will be another crisis, and then another, until, just like Germany’s neighbors in the 1930s, Israel will find herself in a situation over which she no longer has any control.

The government needs to stand up to the Egyptians and tell them that enough is enough. Nip this in the bud and come down hard over an issue that is still manageable to avoid even greater trouble in the future.





=
 
=






Let Us All Hate Together

April 23, 2012:
http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/israel/articles/20120423.aspx

Israeli troops have been preparing for another war in Lebanon for six years now, and in the last year operations into Syria have been considered as well. While there is more violence coming out of Gaza (nearly a thousand rockets and mortar shells in the past year, versus less than twenty from Lebanon) Hezbollah has the larger and more aggressive military force. Both Hamas and Hezbollah are quite open about their plans to eventually resume fighting Israel. For example, efforts to negotiate a peace deal with Hamas have stumbled over Hamas insistence that only a truce, not a peace deal, is possible. Since Hamas set up shop in Gaza eleven years ago, over 12,000 rockets and mortar shells have been fired from Gaza into southern Israel, killing 40 and wounding several hundred. Hamas exists, for the most part, to destroy Israel, and does not hide that element of their charter.


Yet another war is brewing over who has the rights to some of the 122 trillion cubic feet of natural has under the eastern Mediterranean. Worth nearly two trillion dollars, Israel has laid claim to about a quarter of it and is already drilling. But Turkey, Greek Cyprus and Lebanon all have overlapping claims. Turkey and Lebanon threaten to use force to secure their claims. The Lebanese have not got the means to apply force, but Turkey does. Worse, Turkey does not recognize the Greek Cypriot government (while the rest of the world does) and insists Turkish occupied northern Cyprus (recognized by few countries) get some of the natural gas wealth. The battle for all this newfound wealth could cost more than it is worth, but in this part of the world, that is not much of an obstacle for warmongers.

Hamas and Hezbollah continue their efforts to kidnap Israelis, and hold them for ransom. This is because Israel will pay a lot more to free an Israeli than Palestinians will pay to free a Palestinian. But Israeli counter-terror operations continue to arrest potential kidnappers and disrupt these plots before they can be executed. This is an ongoing effort that consumes lots of resources and gets very little publicity.

The Palestinians have growing internal problems. Although most Palestinians consider Fatah (which controls the West Bank) the most corrupt Palestinian political party, Hamas (which controls the 40 percent of Palestinians who live in Gaza) is catching up. Although Hamas sounds more radical in its attitude towards destroying Israel, the two organizations preach the same "wipe out Israel" line to their people via print and electronic media. Hamas is also becoming as corrupt as Fatah. Since taking control of Gaza five years ago, Hamas has reduced the street crime, but its economic and social policies have produced a 30 percent unemployment rate and a corrupt Hamas ruling class that uses force to enrich themselves. It's a police state with religious overtones, and everything that goes wrong is blamed on Israel.

Egypt seems headed for another revolution, with Islamic conservatives taking on the Egyptian military. The generals ordered their troops to stand back when the Mubarak government was under attack by thousands of demonstrators (most of them non-religious democrats) last year. But the Islamic conservative parties had political organizations that could mobilize people to vote for Islamic candidates, while the students and urban democracy demonstrators that led the revolution did not. Faced with the prospect of a government dominated by Islamic conservatives, the army has become more involved in the elections, putting up its own candidates for president, and finding ways to hurt the Islamic parties. The generals believe that the Islamic conservatives are seeking to drive corrupt officers out of the army, and that seems pretty accurate. The army wants to avoid a direct takeover, as that could trigger a bloody civil war. A "managed" election is a safer way to go.

April 22, 2012: The Egyptian natural gas company supplying gas to Israel cancelled the 2005 deal, claiming unspecified contract violations by Israel. The Egyptian gas provided 40 percent of the fuel for Israeli power plants. The pipeline also carried gas to Jordan. The gas deal was always unpopular in Egypt, with opposition leaders insisting the former Mubarak government pocketed much of the money and that Israel was paying too little. Although the contract runs to 2020, Israel will soon be using less of the Egyptian gas because of huge natural gas deposits recently found off the Israeli coast. Egyptian terrorists have damaged the gas pipeline 14 times this year alone, and Israel has had to import gas to make up for the shortages.

Israeli intelligence believes Lebanese Shia militia Hezbollah is heavily involved in Syria, trying to keep the Assad dictatorship in power. But the rebels appear to be winning, and Israel fears that if the Assad dictatorship collapses, Hezbollah will use its thousands of trained gunmen to loot Syrian weapons and munitions. That's a big problem for Israel because Syria has hundreds of ballistic missiles, some armed with chemical weapon warheads. This prospect might trigger Israeli intervention to seize and destroy the Syrian chemical weapons before anyone else can get them. Israel won't admit they are planning an operation like, but senior Israeli commanders are openly complaining about the fate of Syrian chemical weapons.

April 21, 2012: Israel warned its citizens to get out of Sinai, because terrorists there were planning to attack or kidnap Israelis in the area. Egypt protested this warning, saying the Sinai Peninsula was safe, especially for Israeli tourists. But since the Mubarak dictatorship was overthrown in Egypt last year, Egyptian counter-terrorism efforts have diminished, especially in the Sinai.

In the West Bank, Israeli border police arrested two Palestinian men who were carrying explosives, a knife and a pistol. The two were charged with attempted terrorism.

April 20, 2012: Police have analyzed fragments of rockets fired from Sinai at the Israeli town of Eilat twice since March, and found that the rockets were smuggled from Libya. An increasing number of weapons stolen from Libyan military bases last year are showing up in Egypt, but exact numbers are hard to come by.

April 18, 2012: Iran announced that it had arrested 15 foreigners and Iranians and charged them with spying and terrorism. Israel was blamed for organizing this effort.

April 11, 2012: On the Egyptian border, an Egyptian border policeman was wounded in a gun battle with smugglers trying to get African migrants into Israel.

April 8, 2012: Two more rockets from Gaza landed in Israel.

April 7, 2012: Hamas executed three people in Gaza, one for being an Israeli spy, the other two for murder. In the last seven years, Hamas has officially executed 32 people, and murdered several hundred more during police or terror operations (usually against political rival Fatah).

An Israeli UAV fired a missile at two Palestinians attempting to fire rockets into Israel.

Outside Jerusalem, police found four machine-guns and 500 rounds of ammunition in a Palestinian car, and arrested the driver.





=
 
=






Israel’s ‘right’ to hit Iran goes viral

YouTube clips, viewed by over 2 million people,
compare Iranian threat to the Holocaust


By Michal ShmulovichApril 22, 2012, 6:13 pm
http://www.timesofisrael.com/pro-is...-israel-has-legal-moral-right-to-attack-iran/

A series of videos asserting that Israel is within its legal and moral rights to attack Iran have gone viral, and had been seen by over two million people as of Sunday. They were launched by the pro-Israeli activist group The Land of Israel.

The videos assert Israel’s obligation to protect its people from “a genocidal dictator.”

As of Sunday, the first of the videos, “Iran vs. Israel — Back to the future,” had been viewed about 1 million times since it was posted two weeks ago. The second, ”Iran vs. Israel — No fear,” posted late last week, had received over 1,650,000 views at the time of writing.


“Back to the future,” portrays Holocaust-era Jews, powerless and dejected, who tried to enter the United States on the USS St. Louis — but were forced to return to Nazi Germany. To a soundtrack of orchestrated music, American-born Jeremy Gimpel, one of the co-founders of the group, indirectly equates the gravity of the Iranian threat with that of the Holocaust.

“We are reliving the year 1939 — but this time is different,” says Gimpel, referring to the start of World War II and with it the Holocaust.

“But, this time, we have been resurrected,” he adds, referring to the State of Israel and Jews’ ability to defend themselves. ”We must never depend on the help of any other country for survival,” he goes on, asserting that Israel is facing a threat “unparalleled in world history” from Iran.



“No fear,” the second video, narrated by Ari Abramowitz, another American-born co-founder of the group, takes a different approach.

He talks about Iran’s desire to conquer the world and being on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons (if the regime does not have them already, he adds) with sound bites of Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad invoking the leader of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khomeini, at a massive rally — “Our dear imam, you stated that the arrogant powers of the world must be annihilated!” — to which the crowd erupted in cheers.

Abramowitz offers an explanation for the world’s ostensible paralysis vis-à-vis a nuclear Iran. “It’s called cognitive dissonance,” he says, “the subconscious denial of something so terrifying that the gravity of the threat is totally denied despite the catastrophic consequences of inaction.”

He adds that Israel cannot afford to act that way.

A third video is to be posted soon, the group says.

Last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu likened the Iranian threat to the Holocaust in an address marking Holocaust Remembrance Day. Nobel Prize laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel rejected the comparison. “Tehran will not build another Auschwitz,” Wiesel said.

Israeli groups have also taken action against the perceived Israeli gear-up for an attack on Iran. The “Iranians we love you” social media campaign went viral in March after a group of Israelis tried to extend to their Iranian counterparts messages of friendship rather than aggression.

Hundreds also protested the prospect of Israel bombing Iran in Tel Aviv in March.

The Israeli media has recently debated what an Israeli attack on Iran would mean for the Israeli public — and if such an attack is necessary.

The United States and Europe have tried to engage Iran about its nuclear program, and US President Barack Obama indicated that if the Iranians can prove that the nature of its program is demonstrably civilian — and peaceful — that the US would tolerate it.

The last round of talks, in Istanbul, between Iran and the P5+1 group — the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, plus Germany — brought some hope for a breakthrough with Iran, but no concrete decisions were taken. Talks are set to resume in Baghdad on May 23.






=
 
=






Ready to hit Iran if ordered:
Israel military chief


(AFP) / 22 April 2012
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/display...ddleeast_April293.xml&section=middleeast&col=

JERUSALEM - Israeli forces are carrying out more special operations beyond the country’s borders and will be ready to attack Iran’s nuclear sites if ordered, the chief-of-staff said in an interview on Sunday.


In an extract from an interview with the top-selling Yediot Aharanot daily, Lieutenant General Benny Gantz said that 2012 would be a critical year in efforts to halt what Israel and much of the international community believe is an Iranian nuclear arms programme.

“We think that a nuclear Iran is a very bad thing, which the world needs to stop and which Israel needs to stop — and we are planning accordingly,” Gantz said.

“In principle, we are ready to act."​

“That does not mean that I will now order (air force chief) Ido (Nehushtan) to strike Iran,” he added in the interview which will be published in full on Wednesday, on the eve of Israel’s 64th anniversary as a state.

The United States says it does not believe Iran has so far taken a decision to develop a nuclear weapon, or that the time is right for military action, preferring to give international sanctions time to work.

But Israel, which sees a nuclear Iran as a threat to its very existence, claims Tehran may be on the cusp of “breakout” capability — when it could quickly build a nuclear weapon — and it does not rule out staging a pre-emptive strike of its own.

Gantz said he had increased the number of Israeli special operations in other countries but did not give details.

“I do not think you will find a point in time where there is not something happening, somewhere in the world,” he said. “The threat level is also higher.”

“I’m not taking the credit,” he added. “I’m just accelerating all those special operations.”





=
 
=






Report:
Iran detects computer worm targeting oil ministry


By BLOOMBERG
04/23/2012 13:41
http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=267196

Iran yesterday detected a computer worm that targeted the Oil Ministry, the National Iranian Oil Co. and other companies affiliated with the ministry, Mehr reported, without citing anyone.


The malware disrupted Internet access but was detected before it could infect the computer systems, the report said. Officials are looking into the matter, it said without giving further details.




=
 
=







Report:
Iran disconnects oil terminal, other facilities
from Internet to avoid malware attack


Article by: Associated Press
Updated: April 23, 2012 - 5:30 AM
http://www.startribune.com/world/148485135.html

TEHRAN, Iran - An Iranian semiofficial news agency reports that the country has disconnected its main crude oil terminal from the Internet to avoid being attacked by computer malware.


The Monday report from Mehr says the export terminal in Kharg Island and other oil facilities came under attack from malware and hackers but continued their work as usual. It did not provide further details.

It said the oil ministry and other related agencies were also disconnected from the Internet.

Iran says it is in a technological "soft war" with Israel and the West that includes cyberattacks.

Some 80 percent of Iran's daily 2.2 million barrels of crude export is transferred through Kharg Island, located off its southern coast.





=
 
=






Netanyahu war aims take a hit

A number of encouraging signs besides Istanbul talks' success
presage a diplomatic solution to Iran nuclear standoff


By Adel Safty, Special to Gulf News
Published: 00:00 April 23, 2012
http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/netanyahu-war-aims-take-a-hit-1.1012077

The nuclear talks between Iranian officials and the representatives of the so-called 5 plus one group (USA, Russia, China, England and France, plus Germany) which were held in Istanbul on April 14, seem to have gone very well, with the parties agreeing to meet again next month in Baghdad.

US officials described the talks as “a step forward” and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said they were “constructive and useful”.

Iranian Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters on Wednesday, “We are optimistic about the future of negotiations and want the other sides to put their words into action.”


Observers noted a number of encouraging signs that presage a diplomatic solution to the standoff with Iran on the question of alleged intention to build nuclear weapons.

First, the chief Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili came to the talks with a new title: Whereas in previous negotiations his title was representative of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this time, he came as personal representative of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which gives Jalili a more authoritative voice, and the competence to enter into final and legally binding agreements. Also in case the negotiations succeed, the success will be appropriately credited to the vision and sagacity of the supreme leader.

The American press reported that the nuclear talks with Iran were infused with a sense of euphoria. This was apparently generated by the many references Iranian officials have been making about an anti-nuclear weapon fatwa (religious decree) issued by the leader of the Islamic Revolution Ali Khamenei. It forbade the production, proliferation and use of nuclear bombs, to stave off the many external threats and plots against Iran. Recently, at the conference on Disarmament in Geneva, Iran called for negotiations to agree on a treaty banning nuclear weapons and condemned the production of nuclear weapons as “a great sin.”

This naturally makes it possible for the Iranians to claim, in case of a diplomatic resolution of the conflict, that they did not give in to pressure from the West, but that they were acting all along in conformity with Iran’s best national interests.

The most telling sign of a pending agreement, however, came in the form of a statement in which the Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said he could accept a deal that halted uranium enrichment but left enough nuclear fuel for medical isotopes.

The positive feelings the Iran nuclear talks generated were matched by negative assessment from the chief promoter of war — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel who accused the group of 5+1 of giving Iran a ‘freebie’. The Iranians, Netanyahu claimed, will thus be able to continue pursuing their nuclear programme without limitations until the next round of talks scheduled for May 23 in Baghdad.

What is remarkable about this, is not the negative reaction of the Israeli prime minister, but rather the extent to which Washington sought to justify its course of action and its negotiating position. It is as if Washington and the other world powers were negotiating with Iran on behalf of Israel.

Washington insisted that no sanctions would be lifted in the absence of concrete steps on the part of Iran. Obama himself responded to Netanyahu’s criticisms: “We haven’t given away anything,” he said.

US officials insisted that Netanyahu was fully briefed both before and after the Istanbul meeting on the strategy of the six world powers.

An Obama administration official told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that prior to the meeting with the Iranians detailed discussions were held with Israeli officials. Furthermore, Wendy Sherman, the head of the American delegation to the talks, contacted Israel’s ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren, only a few hours after the Istanbul talks were adjourned and gave him a full briefing.

French and German diplomats also reportedly confirmed that officials from French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s office, and from German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s office, also briefed Netanyahu’s aides both before and after the talks with the Iranians.

Missile defence system​

But neither briefing nor coordination of strategies and objectives with the Israelis seemed sufficient to satisfy Netanyahu. That is because his primary objective differs substantially from that pursued by the six powers negotiating with Iran.

The terms of reference for negotiations have been clearly defined and agreed to: (1) the Non-Proliferation Treaty is the basic document for negotiations and agreement. (2) Iran must agree to fulfil all of its international obligations under the Treaty; and (3) the negotiation process will be a gradual step-by-step process that will include the principle of reciprocity.

Israel is not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has steadily refused to allow its nuclear facilities to be inspected by the UN Atomic Energy Agency, or anyone else. Israel therefore cannot demand of Iran what it refuses to do.

It is likely that Netanyahu considers that war against Iran would be the better alternative in the long run. He has already secured American financial and technical support to reinforce the newly introduced missile defence system called Iron Dome, which according to the Israeli press, has had a 90 per cent interception success against rockets launched from Gaza.

The Pentagon has authorised the delivery to Israel of bunker-busting bombs and other sophisticated weapon systems to strengthen its capacity to launch an attack against Iran. This may have been the price Obama had to pay to calm down the belligerent instincts of the Israeli prime minister and get him to postpone any military action against Iran until after the American election in November.

This presents two major advantages for the Obama administration: Give Obama a chance to contest and win the election without the incalculable damage and distraction another war would create during an election year. Secondly, more time without war means a greater chance to achieve a diplomatic resolution of this conflict. Even if this is not the best outcome for Netanyahu, it certainly is for Iran, for the Obama administration, and for the international community.





=
 
=






Israel ready to strike Iran, Lebanon,
Gaza if ordered, says military chief


Sunday, 22 April 2012

Israeli armed forces chief of staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz has said this
year will prove critical in trying to halt an Iranian nuclear arms program.


By AL ARABIYA WITH AFP
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/04/22/209486.html

Israeli forces are carrying out more special operations beyond the country¡¯s borders and will be ready to attack Iran¡¯s nuclear sites, Gaza and Lebanon if ordered, the chief-of-staff said in an interview on Sunday.

In an extract from an interview with the top-selling Yediot Aharanot daily, Lieutenant General Benny Gantz said that 2012 would be a critical year in efforts to halt what Israel and much of the international community believe is an Iranian nuclear arms program.


¡°We think that a nuclear Iran is a very bad thing, which the world needs to stop and which Israel needs to stop ©¤ and we are planning accordingly,¡± Gantz said.

¡°In principle, we are ready to act."

¡°That does not mean that I will now order (air force chief) Ido (Nehushtan) to strike Iran,¡± he added in the interview which will be published in full on Wednesday, on the eve of Israel¡¯s 64th anniversary as a state.

The United States says it does not believe Iran has so far taken a decision to develop a nuclear weapon, or that the time is right for military action, preferring to give international sanctions time to work.

But Israel, which sees a nuclear Iran as a threat to its very existence, claims Tehran may be on the cusp of ¡°breakout¡± capability ©¤ when it could quickly build a nuclear weapon ©¤ and it does not rule out staging a pre-emptive strike of its own.

During the interview, Gantz also addressed special operations carried out by the IDF beyond Israel¡¯s borders, revealing that the scope of such activities has increased significantly compared to the past.

¡°I don¡¯t think you will find a point in time where something isn¡¯t happening somewhere in the world,¡± he said. ¡°The level of risk has increased as well. This is not something invented by Benny Gantz. I¡¯m not taking the credit here. I¡¯m simply accelerating all those special operations.¡±

Regarding the likelihood of a war breaking out this year, Gantz said: ¡°Our intelligence assessment asserts that given the strategic reality and instability in the region, the chance of deteriorating to a war is higher than in the past. There are no indications of war, but the chances of the situation deteriorating into one are higher than in the past.


Gantz on threats from Lebanon, Gaza​


The army chief added that in case of a regional war, the military will be able to cope with the rocket threat from Lebanon and from the Gaza Strip.

¡°I can¡¯t promise no missiles will be landing here. They will be falling; many of them. It won¡¯t be a simple war, neither on the frontlines nor ion the home front,¡± he said. ¡°However, I don¡¯t advice anyone to test us on this front.¡±

¡°When (Hezbollah leader Hassan) Nasrallah comes out of his bunker, he¡¯s concerned ¨C and rightfully so. He saw what happened to Lebanon last time, and it won¡¯t be close to what will happen to Lebanon next time,¡± the army chief said. ¡°I think they understand it well.¡±





=
 
=






How Europe Could Sink Obama

by: Robert Kuttner
April 23, 2012
http://seekingalpha.com/article/517461-how-europe-could-sink-obama

Forget the potential for an unpleasant October surprise emanating in Iran, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan or North Korea. The biggest threat to Barack Obama's re-election is the economic folly of our good friends in the European Union, who seem determined to snuff out their economic recovery -- and ours.

America's own recovery is making very fragile progress. We don't know whether the economy will keep generating jobs well in excess of 200,000 a month, as in January and February, or only a bit more than 100,000 a month as in March. But we do know that exports have been one of our economy's surprising sources of strength, and that Europe is one of America's biggest customers.


But Europe is even more committed to austerity economics than the United States, and as a result Europe is right on the edge of a double-dip recession.

If the American recovery slows even slightly, unemployment could start creeping back up. It is hard to imagine an incumbent president winning re-election with joblessness in excess of eight percent and rising.

The following key differences between austerity politics in the U.S. and the E.U. are worth noting.

First, we have a real central bank, the Federal Reserve. Whatever the Fed's other sins, it is usefully keeping interest rates very low and buying government and other securities as necessary. Consumer debt service expenses, for instance, are falling -- primarily because of record low interest rates. This is good for the recovery.

The European Central Bank (ECB), by contrast, is explicitly prohibited from buying the bonds of EU member governments. With private financial markets speculating against the sovereign bonds of several European countries, the ECB can only help prop up sovereign bonds indirectly. The ECB makes cheap credit available to Europe's banks and the banks in turn buy sovereign bonds.

Since Mario Draghi took over last fall as ECB president, the bank put up about a trillion euros in cheap loans to Europe's banks. The banks have invested most of that money in European government bonds.

But that leaves real enterprises struggling to get bank credit; and as hedge funds bet against sovereign bonds, the banks with their large bond holdings risk losing a lot of money. After several weeks of interest rates on government bonds falling for Italy, Spain, and Portugal, rates are rising again, signaling a new stage of the sovereign debt crisis.

Second, in the fiscal ring of the European circus, the Germans continue to be unrelenting in their refusal to European-ize the debts of smaller nations. Instead, pressure continues on nations such as Spain and Italy to reassure private markets by pursuing stringent austerity.

It should be clear by now from the Greek experience that this strategy backfires. The latest case in point is Spain. The new Spanish conservative government is dutifully cutting Spain's budget. This only reduces the projected growth rate, widens the projected deficit, spooks money markets, and increases the interest costs Spain has to pay to finance its debt. Spain chases its tail, and chases the economy downward.

Deflating your way to prosperity is a fool's errand. It depresses the real economy, and there is no reward from the speculators of the private money markets no matter how much austerity you pursue.

At last week's meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, IMF director-general Christine Lagarde cobbled together pledges totaling about $430 billion to help Europe contain its debt crisis. But the European Central Bank and the German government under Angela Merkel insist coupling the support for the debt of member countries with even more budgetary austerity.

This policy is simply insane. Even Germany, with its large export surplus and low unemployment rate of 6.7 percent, will suffer if the rest of Europe keeps sinking into recession.

Should Socialist Francois Hollande be elected president of France in the runoff election on May 6, that will help create an antidote to the austerity politics that are dominating Europe. It will break the Franco-German conservative axis known as Merkozy. But France is just one country, albeit one of Europe's most important ones. And France alone can't dislodge Europe from the austerity path. Indeed, if France pursues growth while the rest of Europe sticks to austerity, that will just widen France's trade deficit and invite speculation against French government bonds.

A left government in Berlin would help, but the German elections are more than a year away.

In the U.S., at least, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has discarded his predecessor Alan Greenspan's notion that the price of a sensible monetary policy is fiscal austerity. The Fed is providing easy money because Bernanke knows that the economy needs it, not because Congress is embracing any of several austerity plans.

And although President Obama is under severe pressure to pursue an austerity policy -- from the Republicans, from too many commentators, and from Democratic deficit-hawks such as Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad -- Obama for now is stressing recovery and growth first.

Last week at the spring meetings of the Fund and the Bank, however, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner declined to commit a penny of U.S. support to the I.M.F's new war chest to help Europe.

American leverage over Europe is admittedly limited, but some additional aid would have been a nice neighborly gesture. If Europe's misguided belt-tightening policies lead Europe back into recession, Europe could easily drag the U.S. recovery down with it.





=
 
=






Millions face hunger in Sahel
as NGOs struggle to raise aid


April 23, 2012 01:18 PM
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/In...ngos-struggle-to-raise-aid.ashx#axzz1srWEIQnE

DAKAR: Aid agencies said Monday they are facing a multimillion dollar funding shortage to deal with a food crisis in the Sahel where people are resorting to increasingly desperate measures to survive.


"A huge gap in funding for aid projects ... is threatening to leave millions of people hungry in the coming months," a coalition of aid agencies said in a statement.

Action Against Hunger, Oxfam, Save the Children and World Vision said they have raised only $52 million (39 million euros) of $250 million needed to provide emergency assistance to six million people in the region.

The aid agencies have called for a donor pledging conference to rally wealthy governments and donors.

The United Nations had estimated $724 million would be needed to tackle the latest food crisis in the Sahel belt after poor rains in 2011 saw harvests drop by a quarter.

But it has collected less than half of this, said the statement.

The crisis has so far affected Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger but the UN has also raised concerns over Burkina Faso, Senegal and northern parts of Nigeria and Cameroon.

"In the Chadian Sahel, the global acute malnutrition rate already exceeds the emergency threshold of 15 percent and admissions to our feeding centers have increased dramatically," said Patricia Hoorlbeke of Action Against Hunger.

In the Kanem region, over 2,000 severely malnourished children were admitted for therapeutic nutritional care in March.

Steve Cockburn of Oxfam West Africa said: "There is no doubt that families across West Africa are entering a dangerous period, and we have already seen women forced to search for grains in anthills in order to survive."

Chris Palusky of World Vision said the NGO had seen some families "resorting to eating wild leaves, others are barely able to feed children one meal a day."

In January the EU announced it was doubling aid to the Sahel to 95 million euros as 23 million people faced Africa's latest food crisis, after a famine in Somalia last year was believed to have killed tens of thousands.

The United States pledged $120 million in emergency aid to the Sahel in March.


Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/In...ngos-struggle-to-raise-aid.ashx#ixzz1srWNFM5X
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)




=
 
=






N. Korea military warns of 'special actions' soon

April 23, 2012 10:20 AM
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/In...ns-of-special-actions-soon.ashx#axzz1srWEIQnE

PYONGYANG: North Korea's military vowed Monday to launch unspecified "special actions" soon meant to reduce South Korea's conservative government and media companies "to ashes" in less than four minutes, the an escalation of its recent threats.


North Korea regularly criticizes Seoul and just last week renewed its promise to wage a "sacred war," saying South Korean President Lee Myung-bak had insulted the North's April 15 celebrations of the birth centennial of national founder Kim Il Sung.

But Monday's military statement, which vowed actions of "unprecedented peculiar means," was unusual in promising something soon and describing a specific length of time.

The threat follows U.N. condemnation of North Korea's launch of a long-range rocket that exploded shortly after liftoff April 13. Washington, Seoul and others called the launch a cover for testing long-range missile technology. Pyongyang said the launch was meant to put a satellite into orbit.

The North's special actions "will reduce all the rat-like groups and the bases for provocations to ashes in three or four minutes, (or) in much shorter time, by unprecedented peculiar means and methods of our own style," according to the statement by the special operation action group of the Korean People's Army's Supreme Command.

Some South Korean analysts speculated the North's statement was meant to unnerve Seoul; others that the North could be planning terrorist attacks.

It seemed unlikely that North Korea would launch a large-scale military attack against Seoul, which is backed by nearly 30,000 U.S. troops stationed here, said Kim Young-soo, a professor at Sogang University in Seoul.

The North's latest threat, which was carried by its state media, comes amid rising tensions on the Korean peninsula, with both Koreas recently unveiling new missiles.

The animosity has prompted worries that North Korea may conduct a new nuclear test - something it did after rocket launches in 2006 and 2009. South Korean intelligence officials have said that recent satellite images show North Korea has been digging a new tunnel in what appears to be preparation for a third nuclear test.

South Korea's Unification Ministry said it was examining North Korea's intentions behind the statement; the Defense Ministry said no special military movement had been observed in the North. Officials spoke on condition of anonymity, citing office rules.

Relations between the Koreas have been abysmal since Lee took office in 2008 with a hard-line policy that ended unconditional aid shipments to the North.

In Beijing, North Korea's biggest ally, China's top foreign policy official met Sunday with a North Korean delegation and expressed confidence in the country's new young leader, Kim Jong Un.


Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/In...ns-of-special-actions-soon.ashx#ixzz1srXFGKX4
(The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb)



=
 
=





:shkr:
N. Korea threatens military strike
against S. Korean president


By Chico Harlan
Monday, April 23, 5:44 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...an-president/2012/04/23/gIQA5MTdbT_story.html


TOKYO — North Korea issued an ominous new threat Monday in its campaign against South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, vowing to carry out a special military attack that would reduce parts of Seoul to ash “in three or four minutes ... by unprecedented peculiar means and methods of our own style.”

The North’s state-run news agency said the “targets are the Lee Myung-bak group of traitors, the arch criminals, and the group of rat-like elements including conservative media destroying the mainstay of the fair public opinion.”


The statement, attributed to a “special operation action group” of the Korean People's Army, provided no additional details about how the attack might be carried out. But analysts said the statement differed from Pyongyang’s usual calls for sacred war and fiery revenge — background noise on the peninsula — because it laid out the scenario of a specific, targeted military strike.

“I suppose their threat is very concrete,” said Park Hyeong-jung, a North Korea researcher at Seoul’s Korea Institute for National Unification. “They said they will do it very soon, and this is unusual.”

The North has spent years criticizing Lee, a conservative who ended the generous aid policies of his predecessors, but it has taken sharper aim in the last week. Thousands of Pyongyang residents and army members met Friday in Kim Il Sung Square, pledging during a rally to “wipe out” Lee and his allies.

The North also revised its state-run news agency Web site, creating a banner that cycles through anti-Lee messages such as “Let Us Cut Off Windpipes of the Lee Myung-bak-led Swarm of Rats!” Recent articles also have called him “human scum” and an “underwit with 2MB of knowledge.”

“It is, therefore, a tragedy and shame for the nation to see Lee still alive,” one story said.

In recent days, Lee has publicly estimated the price ($850 million) of the North’s failed rocket launch on April 13 and said the money could have been used for several million tons of corn. He also suggested that new leader Kim Jong Eun privatize the impoverished nation’s agricultural land to stoke the economy.

Experts in Seoul on Monday speculated that the North may be planning a cyberattack or another military provocation, similar to its island-shelling or its torpedoing of a warship in 2010. But Seoul’s Defense Ministry saw no immediate change in the North’s military movements, according to the Associated Press.

Government officials in Seoul also fear that the North is preparing for another underground nuclear test, citing excavation activity visible on recent satellite images.





=
 
=






North Korea Threatens
Seoul With Military Action


By CHOE SANG-HUN
Published: April 23, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/w...hreatens-seoul-with-military-action.html?_r=1

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea on Monday accused the South’s government and news media of slandering its leadership and threatened “special actions” by the military.

North Korea has regularly threatened to attack the government of President Lee Myung-bak of South Korea. In recent weeks, its threats have become harsher and more specific, prompting some analysts to warn that North Korea’s new leadership under Kim Jong-un might instigate a military provocation as part of its effort to establish Mr. Kim’s authority at home and boost his negotiating leverage with the United States.


On Monday, the North Korean military said it would act “soon” and named its targets, including the government of President Lee and several South Korean newspapers and television stations.

“The special actions of our revolutionary armed forces will start soon to meet the reckless challenge of the group of traitors,” the North Korean military command’s “special operation action group” said in a statement carried by the North’s state-run Korean Central News Agency. “They will reduce all the rat-like groups and the bases for provocations to ashes in three or four minutes, in much shorter time, by unprecedented peculiar means and methods of our own style.”

The Defense Ministry in Seoul stuck to its policy of not reacting to what it considers North Korean propaganda, but repeated that the South Korean military and its American allies were ready to cope with any provocation from the North.

The mutual criticism of the two Koreas has grown harsher since North Korea defied international pressure and launched a rocket on April 13 in a failed attempt to put a satellite into orbit.

Mr. Lee called the launch a waste of money that could have been used to buy food for the North Koreans. Last week, he also advised “the young leader in the North” to abandon his country’s collective farm system to resolve its food problem. South Korea also unveiled a new cruise missile capable of hitting targets anywhere in the North.

North Korea staged mass rallies of soldiers and workers calling the Lee government “a group of rats” — an extremely offensive phrase in Korean culture — and vowing to destroy it.

The risk of North Korea stoking animosity and tension has grown as the country faces deepening sanctions following its failed rocket launch, said Yang Moo-jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies.

“They use brinkmanship to grab the attention of the United States and China,” Mr. Yang said. “Now, there is a higher possibility that the North Koreans will act.”

So far, none of the North’s recent threats has translated into an armed provocation, partly because the North has concentrated on political events at home, such as party and parliamentary meetings earlier this month that completed Mr. Kim’s official ascension to supreme power, said Cheong Seong-chang at the Sejong Institute in South Korea.

“Now that all of these events are over, North Korea appears to be turning its attention toward the outside world and preparing for a provocation against South Korea,” Mr. Cheong said.

Mr. Cheong warned that South Korea must prepare for North Korean provocations, such as hacking of government and news media Web sites and even bio-chemical attacks. Mr. Yang said North Korea’s actions would be limited to provocations that target the government, but not the South Korean public.

South Korean officials, including President Lee, have recently warned that North Korea might attempt provocations to influence the outcome of South Korea’s presidential election in December.

In a paper released over the weekend, Choi Jin-wook, an analyst at the government-funded Korea Institute for Unification Studies warned that Mr. Kim’s less-than-solid control on power and the elite’s competition to prove their loyalty amid an unfolding political purge make the decision-making in Pyongyang more unpredictable. Recent reshuffles in Pyongyang have been marked by the rise and fall of key officials.

“If Kim Jong-un does not control the North’s characteristic brinkmanship from overheating amid the elite’s loyalty drive, we will see provocations,” Mr. Choi said.






=
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
=






Report:
Iran detects computer worm targeting oil ministry


By BLOOMBERG
04/23/2012 13:41
http://www.jpost.com/Headlines/Article.aspx?id=267196

Iran yesterday detected a computer worm that targeted the Oil Ministry, the National Iranian Oil Co. and other companies affiliated with the ministry, Mehr reported, without citing anyone.


The malware disrupted Internet access but was detected before it could infect the computer systems, the report said. Officials are looking into the matter, it said without giving further details.




=

Good Morning, Dutch!

Fox Business Channel announced, about 30 minutes ago, that Kharg Island's petrochemical facilities have been hit with a virus affecting production, and have been shut down. Number given of percentage of production, Iran wide, is somewhere around 15-18%. With their economy already on shaky legs, this could get "interesting..."

With the world's markets getting hammered, Holland's Prime Minister has just submitted their government's resignation to their Queen, who will order a national election to replace the government. The economy is blamed...

Yeah, my friend, we are looking at a perfect poop storm building... First overseas, then here...

Thanks for all you do, Dutch...

OA, out...
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
=






Netanyahu war aims take a hit

A number of encouraging signs besides Istanbul talks' success
presage a diplomatic solution to Iran nuclear standoff


By Adel Safty, Special to Gulf News
Published: 00:00 April 23, 2012
http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/netanyahu-war-aims-take-a-hit-1.1012077

The nuclear talks between Iranian officials and the representatives of the so-called 5 plus one group (USA, Russia, China, England and France, plus Germany) which were held in Istanbul on April 14, seem to have gone very well, with the parties agreeing to meet again next month in Baghdad.

US officials described the talks as “a step forward” and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said they were “constructive and useful”.

Iranian Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters on Wednesday, “We are optimistic about the future of negotiations and want the other sides to put their words into action.”


Observers noted a number of encouraging signs that presage a diplomatic solution to the standoff with Iran on the question of alleged intention to build nuclear weapons.

First, the chief Iranian negotiator Saeed Jalili came to the talks with a new title: Whereas in previous negotiations his title was representative of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, this time, he came as personal representative of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which gives Jalili a more authoritative voice, and the competence to enter into final and legally binding agreements. Also in case the negotiations succeed, the success will be appropriately credited to the vision and sagacity of the supreme leader.

The American press reported that the nuclear talks with Iran were infused with a sense of euphoria. This was apparently generated by the many references Iranian officials have been making about an anti-nuclear weapon fatwa (religious decree) issued by the leader of the Islamic Revolution Ali Khamenei. It forbade the production, proliferation and use of nuclear bombs, to stave off the many external threats and plots against Iran. Recently, at the conference on Disarmament in Geneva, Iran called for negotiations to agree on a treaty banning nuclear weapons and condemned the production of nuclear weapons as “a great sin.”

This naturally makes it possible for the Iranians to claim, in case of a diplomatic resolution of the conflict, that they did not give in to pressure from the West, but that they were acting all along in conformity with Iran’s best national interests.

The most telling sign of a pending agreement, however, came in the form of a statement in which the Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said he could accept a deal that halted uranium enrichment but left enough nuclear fuel for medical isotopes.

The positive feelings the Iran nuclear talks generated were matched by negative assessment from the chief promoter of war — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel who accused the group of 5+1 of giving Iran a ‘freebie’. The Iranians, Netanyahu claimed, will thus be able to continue pursuing their nuclear programme without limitations until the next round of talks scheduled for May 23 in Baghdad.

What is remarkable about this, is not the negative reaction of the Israeli prime minister, but rather the extent to which Washington sought to justify its course of action and its negotiating position. It is as if Washington and the other world powers were negotiating with Iran on behalf of Israel.

Washington insisted that no sanctions would be lifted in the absence of concrete steps on the part of Iran. Obama himself responded to Netanyahu’s criticisms: “We haven’t given away anything,” he said.

US officials insisted that Netanyahu was fully briefed both before and after the Istanbul meeting on the strategy of the six world powers.

An Obama administration official told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that prior to the meeting with the Iranians detailed discussions were held with Israeli officials. Furthermore, Wendy Sherman, the head of the American delegation to the talks, contacted Israel’s ambassador to Washington, Michael Oren, only a few hours after the Istanbul talks were adjourned and gave him a full briefing.

French and German diplomats also reportedly confirmed that officials from French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s office, and from German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s office, also briefed Netanyahu’s aides both before and after the talks with the Iranians.

Missile defence system​

But neither briefing nor coordination of strategies and objectives with the Israelis seemed sufficient to satisfy Netanyahu. That is because his primary objective differs substantially from that pursued by the six powers negotiating with Iran.

The terms of reference for negotiations have been clearly defined and agreed to: (1) the Non-Proliferation Treaty is the basic document for negotiations and agreement. (2) Iran must agree to fulfil all of its international obligations under the Treaty; and (3) the negotiation process will be a gradual step-by-step process that will include the principle of reciprocity.

Israel is not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has steadily refused to allow its nuclear facilities to be inspected by the UN Atomic Energy Agency, or anyone else. Israel therefore cannot demand of Iran what it refuses to do.

It is likely that Netanyahu considers that war against Iran would be the better alternative in the long run. He has already secured American financial and technical support to reinforce the newly introduced missile defence system called Iron Dome, which according to the Israeli press, has had a 90 per cent interception success against rockets launched from Gaza.

The Pentagon has authorised the delivery to Israel of bunker-busting bombs and other sophisticated weapon systems to strengthen its capacity to launch an attack against Iran. This may have been the price Obama had to pay to calm down the belligerent instincts of the Israeli prime minister and get him to postpone any military action against Iran until after the American election in November.

This presents two major advantages for the Obama administration: Give Obama a chance to contest and win the election without the incalculable damage and distraction another war would create during an election year. Secondly, more time without war means a greater chance to achieve a diplomatic resolution of this conflict. Even if this is not the best outcome for Netanyahu, it certainly is for Iran, for the Obama administration, and for the international community.





=

Dutch, this won't stand in Israel's way, if they have to go "hot." Germany's economy is now in the toilet, and "recession" is now being discussed... Add to that, France's reaction to their economy at the polls this last weekend... Sarkozy is probably out, to be replaced by a Socialist. Forget the Euro, forget Europe...

The Chinese are jumping froggy, and who knows what they'll do? My guess? They'll muscle their way into control of the Seychelles, as well as the entire South China Sea, when the economy, worldwide, tanks... When that happens, the NorKs will move South... Mad Vlad won't sit on his hands, and will reunite the old Soviet Union... WE have been marginalized, and may not be able to even defend Israel...

Sad state of affairs, ain't it?

Hang in there, Pard...

OA, out...
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
=






How Europe Could Sink Obama

by: Robert Kuttner
April 23, 2012
http://seekingalpha.com/article/517461-how-europe-could-sink-obama

Forget the potential for an unpleasant October surprise emanating in Iran, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan or North Korea. The biggest threat to Barack Obama's re-election is the economic folly of our good friends in the European Union, who seem determined to snuff out their economic recovery -- and ours.

America's own recovery is making very fragile progress. We don't know whether the economy will keep generating jobs well in excess of 200,000 a month, as in January and February, or only a bit more than 100,000 a month as in March. But we do know that exports have been one of our economy's surprising sources of strength, and that Europe is one of America's biggest customers.


But Europe is even more committed to austerity economics than the United States, and as a result Europe is right on the edge of a double-dip recession.

If the American recovery slows even slightly, unemployment could start creeping back up. It is hard to imagine an incumbent president winning re-election with joblessness in excess of eight percent and rising.

The following key differences between austerity politics in the U.S. and the E.U. are worth noting.

First, we have a real central bank, the Federal Reserve. Whatever the Fed's other sins, it is usefully keeping interest rates very low and buying government and other securities as necessary. Consumer debt service expenses, for instance, are falling -- primarily because of record low interest rates. This is good for the recovery.

The European Central Bank (ECB), by contrast, is explicitly prohibited from buying the bonds of EU member governments. With private financial markets speculating against the sovereign bonds of several European countries, the ECB can only help prop up sovereign bonds indirectly. The ECB makes cheap credit available to Europe's banks and the banks in turn buy sovereign bonds.

Since Mario Draghi took over last fall as ECB president, the bank put up about a trillion euros in cheap loans to Europe's banks. The banks have invested most of that money in European government bonds.

But that leaves real enterprises struggling to get bank credit; and as hedge funds bet against sovereign bonds, the banks with their large bond holdings risk losing a lot of money. After several weeks of interest rates on government bonds falling for Italy, Spain, and Portugal, rates are rising again, signaling a new stage of the sovereign debt crisis.

Second, in the fiscal ring of the European circus, the Germans continue to be unrelenting in their refusal to European-ize the debts of smaller nations. Instead, pressure continues on nations such as Spain and Italy to reassure private markets by pursuing stringent austerity.

It should be clear by now from the Greek experience that this strategy backfires. The latest case in point is Spain. The new Spanish conservative government is dutifully cutting Spain's budget. This only reduces the projected growth rate, widens the projected deficit, spooks money markets, and increases the interest costs Spain has to pay to finance its debt. Spain chases its tail, and chases the economy downward.

Deflating your way to prosperity is a fool's errand. It depresses the real economy, and there is no reward from the speculators of the private money markets no matter how much austerity you pursue.

At last week's meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, IMF director-general Christine Lagarde cobbled together pledges totaling about $430 billion to help Europe contain its debt crisis. But the European Central Bank and the German government under Angela Merkel insist coupling the support for the debt of member countries with even more budgetary austerity.

This policy is simply insane. Even Germany, with its large export surplus and low unemployment rate of 6.7 percent, will suffer if the rest of Europe keeps sinking into recession.

Should Socialist Francois Hollande be elected president of France in the runoff election on May 6, that will help create an antidote to the austerity politics that are dominating Europe. It will break the Franco-German conservative axis known as Merkozy. But France is just one country, albeit one of Europe's most important ones. And France alone can't dislodge Europe from the austerity path. Indeed, if France pursues growth while the rest of Europe sticks to austerity, that will just widen France's trade deficit and invite speculation against French government bonds.

A left government in Berlin would help, but the German elections are more than a year away.

In the U.S., at least, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has discarded his predecessor Alan Greenspan's notion that the price of a sensible monetary policy is fiscal austerity. The Fed is providing easy money because Bernanke knows that the economy needs it, not because Congress is embracing any of several austerity plans.

And although President Obama is under severe pressure to pursue an austerity policy -- from the Republicans, from too many commentators, and from Democratic deficit-hawks such as Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad -- Obama for now is stressing recovery and growth first.

Last week at the spring meetings of the Fund and the Bank, however, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner declined to commit a penny of U.S. support to the I.M.F's new war chest to help Europe.

American leverage over Europe is admittedly limited, but some additional aid would have been a nice neighborly gesture. If Europe's misguided belt-tightening policies lead Europe back into recession, Europe could easily drag the U.S. recovery down with it.





=

Great article, Dutch! The Dictator is on track to turn America, and Western Civilization, into the kind of world Mohammad would have loved... A global, third world environment- with no technology, no industry, and barbarism on the menu... Sharia, coming to a neighborhood near you...

OA, out...

PS, if The Dictator could bring us down, he wouldn't be worried about being re-elected... He'd have achieved his highest goals- bringing down the Great and Little Satan's, as well as ushering in the Worldwide Caliphate... Yeah, even he would call that "good..."
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
=






North Korea Threatens
Seoul With Military Action


By CHOE SANG-HUN
Published: April 23, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/w...hreatens-seoul-with-military-action.html?_r=1

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea on Monday accused the South’s government and news media of slandering its leadership and threatened “special actions” by the military...


This is the story of the day. Folks, don't pooh-pooh this one, all the wolf-crying of the past notwithstanding. There's a new guy in charge, the big hitters in the market seem to know that something's up, and NK's buddy Iran is being hit by a fairly crippling virus attack on their oil industry... The Furball approacheth.
 

almost ready

Inactive
Sunday, April 22nd, 2012 | Posted by admin
Iran announces blockade of Strait of Hormuz and claims U.S. is complying

Special to WorldTribune.com

NICOSIA — In the first such claim, Iran said it was imposing a blockade on
unauthorized ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

A senior commander for Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps said all ships, including those from the
U.S. Navy, must undergo inspection before proceeding through the strait.


Iranian naval ships during exercises in the Strait of Hormuz in January. /AFP/Getty Images

“The alien vessels which enter the Persian Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz always provide the needed answers and information to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps units,” IRGC deputy navy commander Rear Adm. Alireza Tangsiri said.

In a statement on April 18, Tangsiri said IRGC was already enforcing the blockade of Hormuz. The officer said the U.S. Navy was submitting information before its ships, including an aircraft carrier, enter Hormuz.

“This vessel, similar to the other warships, answered all the questions
asked by the IRGC Navy without any problem or making any particular move and then continued the path to its specified destination,” Tangsiri said.

In mid-April, the U.S. Navy deployed a second aircraft carrier in the
Gulf. The USS Enterprise, based in the Gulf Cooperation Council sheikdom of
Bahrain, joined the Abraham Lincoln in what the navy termed a routine
deployment in the region.

Later, another senior Iranian commander confirmed Teheran’s policy.
Iranian Army commander Gen. Ataollah Salehi said the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet
was warned to stay away from unspecified areas in Hormuz.

“We have warned them before that some areas in the Persian Gulf are
considered by us as zones of threat and they should not stop in those
areas,” Salehi said. “Of course, they have paid attention to the warning and
are respecting it.”


http://www.worldnewstribune.com/201...strait-of-hormuz-and-claims-u-s-is-complying/
 

BREWER

Veteran Member
Posted for fair use and discussion.
http://www.debka.com/article/21936/

China steps back from supporting Assad, parts ways with Russia
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report April 22, 2012, 10:56 PM (GMT+02:00)
Tags: China Bashar Assad US-Syria oil embargo
Assad scrambles for cash to fund his war

Beijing has decided to distance itself from the Assad regime of Syria. Notice of this policy shift came about in a secret exchange of messages with the Obama administration, revealed here exclusively by debkafile’s Washington sources. The latest message received in the latter half of last week said: China will no longer be a problem for America in dealing with Assad. That leaves only Russia.

This change of face surfaced at the UN Security Council on Saturday, April 21, when after voting for another 300 observers for Syria, the Chinese delegate Li Baodong made an unusual speech:

“We also call upon the international community to continue its firm support for Mr. Annan’s good offices’ efforts and consolidate the results achieved, and we strongly oppose any word and act aimed at creating difficulties for Mr. Annan’s good offices.”

Li went on to say: “China always maintained that the independence, sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Syria as well as the choice and the will of the Syrian people should be respected.”

Western sources stress that, with this speech, the Chinese ambassador stepped aside from Russia’s uncompromising backing for the Syrian ruler. Moscow remained the only world power acting to limit the UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan’s powers and the effectiveness of the UN monitors by denying them proper equipment and authority for overseeing an end to the violence in Syria.

The shift in Chinese policy was noted by Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan on April 10 when, after visiting Beijing, he remarked: “China is not in the same position as it was before. It is shifting away from full support for Assad’s regime.”

debkafile’s Washington sources believe that the Obama administration can count this change of face as a return on its policy of nuclear appeasement of - and rapprochement with - Tehran.

A senior US official said that what concerns Beijing most is the US oil embargo on Iran and its effect on the Chinese economy. Now that the Chinese see signs of a possible loosening up of sanctions especially in relation to Iranian oil exports in the wake of evolving US-Iranian deals, they are breathing a deep sigh of relief and prepared to be more accommodating to the US in its policy on Syria.

The approaching easing of sanctions against Iranian oil was signaled Saturday, April 21, by an announcement in Tehran that new purchasing contracts for the whole of 2012 had come in from the Asian refineries which were in trade relations with Iran.

Beijing is reported by our sources as having turned down an appeal from the Assad regime to purchase tens of billions of dollars worth of Syrian government bonds to tide it over its economic distress for the duration of the war. Last week, Assad was revealed to be so cash-strapped as to start dipping into the national gold reserves held in the Syrian state bank and selling the precious metal on financial markets in Dubai.

China’s defection will not immediately bring Bashar Assad crashing down, but it is a vote of no-confidence by a key world power in his survivability. It leaves Tehran and Moscow as the only props of his regime and may well inspire second thoughts in either or both of his champions.
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
This is the story of the day. Folks, don't pooh-pooh this one, all the wolf-crying of the past notwithstanding. There's a new guy in charge, the big hitters in the market seem to know that something's up, and NK's buddy Iran is being hit by a fairly crippling virus attack on their oil industry... The Furball approacheth.

TheSearcher,

Good response. Concur. The NorKs may jump froggy, and if they do, we're not in any good position to respond... Divide and conquer... Works every time, if you're out there, alone, twisting in the wind... We don't have the assets in place, nor most likely, the national will, to make a difference... Not quite as bad as post-Vietnam, but certainly approaching it...

OA, out...
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Considering who's running things in Khartoum you'd think dealing with this wouldn't have to be an exercise in hand wringing for the members of the UN Security Council... but then there I go again making sense and taking their statements of ideals verbatim....This is definitely going to go very bad in a real hurry.....Housecarl

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/23/us-sudan-south-bombing-idUSBRE83M13T20120423

Sudan bombing a "declaration of war": South
By Hereward Holland

OUTSIDE BENTIU, South Sudan | Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:24pm EDT

(Reuters) - Sudanese war planes bombed a market in the capital of South Sudan's oil-producing Unity State on Monday, residents and officials said, in an attack the southern army called a declaration of war.

Sudan denied carrying out any air raids but its President Omar Hassan al-Bashir ramped up the political tension by ruling out a return to negotiations with the South, saying its government only understood "the language of the gun".

A Reuters journalist saw aircraft dropping two bombs near a bridge linking two areas of Unity's capital Bentiu, although it was impossible to verify the planes' affiliation. He saw market stalls ablaze and the body of one child.

Weeks of border fighting have brought the neighbors closer to a full-blown war than at any time since the South split away from Sudan as an independent country in July.

The two halves of the country went their separate ways last year without settling a list of bitter disputes over the position of their shared border, the ownership of key territories and how much the landlocked South should pay to transport its oil through Sudan.

The disputes have halted nearly all the oil production that underpins both struggling economies.

"Bashir is declaring war on South Sudan. It's something obvious," southern army (SPLA) spokesman Philip Aguer told Reuters after the Bentiu bombing.

Aguer and the United Nations Mission in South Sudan said two people were killed in the air strike.

"Early reports indicate the bombings started at 8.30 hours and that Rubkona market has been struck," the U.N. mission in South Sudan said in a statement, without spelling out who carried out the attack.

"These indiscriminate bombings resulting in the loss of civilian lives must stop," said Hilde F. Johnson, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for South Sudan.

The mission said its officers had seen one bomb land on the market and three near a bridge. "A young boy burned to death as the hut he was in caught fire from the blast in Rubkona market area", it quoted one of its officers as saying.

Sudan denied carrying out any air attacks in the area. "We have no relation to what happened in Unity state, and we absolutely did not bomb anywhere in South Sudan," the country's military spokesman, Al-Sawarmi Khalid, said.

"LANGUAGE OF THE GUN"

In the worst fighting since the split, South Sudan earlier this month seized the disputed oil-producing territory of Heglig - then announced it had started withdrawing on Friday, following sharp criticism from U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Bashir, dressed in military uniform, visited the Heglig region on Monday, descending from his plane to shouts of "Allahu akbar" - "God is greatest" - from soldiers and officials gathered on the tarmac.

Speaking to Sudanese army troops, he vowed not to negotiate with South Sudan after it had occupied the region.

"We will not negotiate with the South's government, because they don't understand anything but the language of the gun and ammunition," he said at a barracks near the oilfield along the contested border.

A Reuters journalist on an official tour of the region filmed bombed-out pipelines dripping oil in the largely damaged Heglig oilfield, as well as heavy damage to the central processing facility, power station and other infrastructure.

Abdelazeem Hassan Abdallah, an oil worker in Heglig, accused South Sudan's forces of attacking the oilfield.

"They know how to do the job completely. They destroyed our main power plant, and they destroyed our processing facilities," he told Reuters.

"CAPABLE OF CAPTURING HEGLIG"

General Kamal Abdul Maarouf, a Sudanese army commander who led the battles in Heglig, said his troops had killed 1,200 South Sudanese soldiers in fighting in the area, an account South Sudan denied.

Journalists travelling on an official trip to the region said they saw bodies strewn on the road to the barracks. Some clearly had South Sudanese flags on their uniforms, but it was not always possible to verify their nationalities.

Aguer dismissed Maarouf's report. "The number of casualties the SPLA has suffered since the 26th or March doesn't exceed 50," he said.

South Sudan won its independence in a referendum that was promised in a 2005 peace accord that ended decades of civil war between Khartoum and the south.

South Sudan's armed forces have 10 helicopters but no fixed-wing aircraft, except for one Beech 1900 light transport aircraft, according to an International Institute for Strategic Studies report.

(Additional reporting by Khalid Abdelaziz and Alexander Dziadosz in Khartoum; El-Tayeb Siddig in Heglig; Writing by Ulf Laessing, Alexander Dziadosz and Yara Bayoumy; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

Related News

Sudan bombs South Sudan border area, Bashir rules out talks
11:12am EDT
Sudan bombs South Sudan border area, kills three: witnesses
6:22am EDT
Sudan, South Sudan swap accusations of attacks, church raided
Sun, Apr 22 2012
Sudan says repulses rebel attack in border state
Sun, Apr 22 2012
South Sudan withdraws from oil area, easing border crisis
Fri, Apr 20 2012
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2012/04/23/US-EU-press-for-calm-in-Sudan/UPI-67501335201562/

Special Reports
U.S., EU press for calm in Sudan
Published: April 23, 2012 at 1:19 PM

WASHINGTON, April 23 (UPI) -- The United States calls on South Sudan and Sudan to agree to an immediate end to the hostilities and restate their commitment to peace, a spokeswoman said.

Victoria Nuland, a spokeswoman for the U.S. State Department, said the White House condemned an attack Sunday by Sudanese forces on the South Sudanese state of Unity.

"We recognize the right of South Sudan to self-defense and urge South Sudan to exercise restraint in its reaction to Sudan's attack in Unity state and to refrain from disproportionate actions which would only further inflame the hostilities between the parties," she said in a statement.

Tensions between both sides escalated after South Sudan captured Heglig, an oil town near ill-defined borders of the countries. South Sudan last week pulled its forces from the region, though Nuland said more was expected.

The Council of the European Union said Monday it was "deeply concerned" by escalating conflict between both countries.

"The use of force will not resolve any of the outstanding issues between the two countries," an EU statement read.

South Sudan became an independent nation under the terms of a 2005 agreement with Sudan. Border tensions, ethnic conflicts and disputes over oil are threatening the fragile peace, however.

Topics: Victoria Nuland
Recommended Stories

Sudan denies bombing in South Sudan
South Sudan leaving disputed oil area
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use......
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rizwan-ladha/an-iranian-nuclear-weapon_b_1436345.html


Rizwan Ladha: PhD candidate, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
GET UPDATES FROM Rizwan Ladha

Iran -- Nuclear Weapons, Not Energy
Posted: 04/23/2012 11:27 am

Iran claims its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but the majority of the rest of the world questions this assertion. And for good reason: A thorough assessment of the evidence shows that Iran's end goal is a nuclear weapons capability, not nuclear energy.

Before we get into evidence, though, it is first important to distinguish a nuclear weapon from a nuclear weapons capability. This distinction may not sound substantial, but it has tremendous technical and policy implications. On the one hand, a nuclear weapon means the end goal of the Iranian program is to actually build a physical bomb, complete with explosives package, fissile material, and casing -- perhaps even mated to a delivery vehicle. This is a tangible result, something we can see and touch. On the other hand, a nuclear weapons capability means the end goal of the Iranian nuclear program is to stop one step short of building the physical bomb. The necessary components are in place, but no actual weapon has been produced.

Iran seeks the latter -- a weapons capability -- and as a result is pursuing a nuclear hedging strategy. That is, Iran is shortening the ramp-up time it would need to produce a working bomb, just in case it ever believes it needs one. And there is evidence that it has conducted significant research and development in this space: The November 2011 IAEA Board of Governors report includes a hefty annex that details the weapons-specific research and development Iran has conducted in recent years. While the 2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate has concluded that Iran has suspended its progress in this space, there is ample evidence to demonstrate that Iran's leaders are interested in developing the kinds of components, technologies and knowledge necessary to construct a nuclear weapon, not develop nuclear energy.

Yet Iran consistently claims that nuclear weapons are a "grave sin" in Islam, and that it is impossible for the Islamic Republic of Iran to produce such weapons of death and destruction. Further, Iran's argument goes, in order to have a peaceful nuclear power program it needs to domestically produce enriched uranium. But this is a flimsy argument. A 2007 Nonproliferation Review article demonstrates that until a country has between five and twenty nuclear energy reactors (each one at or above 1,000 megawatts), it doesn't have the economic justification to invest in domestic uranium enrichment, since this technological capability requires very substantial investments that span years and often decades to bring to fruition.

The economies of scale simply don't exist in the Iranian case: Iran only has one power-generating nuclear reactor, at Bushehr. This one facility took 35 years to build, and only with significant international assistance. It was connected to the Iranian power grid just recently, in September 2011, and will finally become fully operational this summer. Therefore, the claim by Iran that it intends to have seven operational reactors by 2025 seems dubious.

In addition, if Iran's end objective was to develop nuclear energy, not nuclear weapons, it would not be making some very suspicious moves in recent times. First, Iran has tripled its total uranium output, which suggests it is stockpiling this material for future use, and ostensibly not in a power program due to the considerations mentioned above. Second, Iran has increased its enrichment levels to 19.75 percent, which is well above the level needed for nuclear power purposes but just below the internationally defined threshold of what constitutes high enriched uranium (HEU), which is 20 percent. Remember, nuclear energy-generating reactors, including the one at Bushehr, typically need 3-5 percent enriched uranium, known as low-enriched uranium (LEU), and nothing more than that.

The explanation given by Iran for producing this 19.75 percent enriched uranium is that it intends to use it for the Tehran Research Reactor, which currently can accept uranium enriched to higher levels for research purposes and/or to create isotopes used in medical applications. But if this were indeed the case, Iran could and should have accepted any one of the three multilateral fuel supply arrangements proposed in the past five years. Yet it has rejected them all, insisting ad nauseam that it has the right to produce its own uranium -- and while this is legally true, Iran is not acting in good faith with respect to those rights.

When looking at the Iranian nuclear program, rhetoric does not match action on all counts. Iran's end goal is not nuclear energy, but a weapons capability. To be sure, this piece is not intended to advocate any kind of military action against Iran, but rather to provide an objective assessment of Iran's intentions. Only by taking a clear-eyed view of Iran can the international community move forward with Iran in dealing with its nuclear weapons ambitions.

Follow Rizwan Ladha on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rizwanladha
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Sunday, April 22nd, 2012 | Posted by admin
Iran announces blockade of Strait of Hormuz and claims U.S. is complying

Special to WorldTribune.com

NICOSIA — In the first such claim, Iran said it was imposing a blockade on
unauthorized ships in the Strait of Hormuz.

A senior commander for Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps said all ships, including those from the
U.S. Navy, must undergo inspection before proceeding through the strait.


Iranian naval ships during exercises in the Strait of Hormuz in January. /AFP/Getty Images

“The alien vessels which enter the Persian Gulf via the Strait of Hormuz always provide the needed answers and information to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps units,” IRGC deputy navy commander Rear Adm. Alireza Tangsiri said.

In a statement on April 18, Tangsiri said IRGC was already enforcing the blockade of Hormuz. The officer said the U.S. Navy was submitting information before its ships, including an aircraft carrier, enter Hormuz.

“This vessel, similar to the other warships, answered all the questions
asked by the IRGC Navy without any problem or making any particular move and then continued the path to its specified destination,” Tangsiri said.

In mid-April, the U.S. Navy deployed a second aircraft carrier in the
Gulf. The USS Enterprise, based in the Gulf Cooperation Council sheikdom of
Bahrain, joined the Abraham Lincoln in what the navy termed a routine
deployment in the region.

Later, another senior Iranian commander confirmed Teheran’s policy.
Iranian Army commander Gen. Ataollah Salehi said the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet
was warned to stay away from unspecified areas in Hormuz.

“We have warned them before that some areas in the Persian Gulf are
considered by us as zones of threat and they should not stop in those
areas,” Salehi said. “Of course, they have paid attention to the warning and
are respecting it.”


http://www.worldnewstribune.com/201...strait-of-hormuz-and-claims-u-s-is-complying/

I can see this going real "dumb" without any warning at all...
 

almost ready

Inactive
Nose to nose, forehead to forehead, as Captain Ahab and the Whale, can't get much closer without getting in one another's pants....
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Russian Stock Market Shut Down
Started by Jonas Parker‎, Today 10:48 AM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?403542-Russian-Stock-Market-Shut-Down

North Korea about to attack the South???
Started by onetimer‎, Yesterday 09:46 PM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showthread.php?403495-North-Korea-about-to-attack-the-South

_____

For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...g-peace-plan/2012/04/23/gIQAaQwCcT_story.html

UN: Syria still using heavy weapons and not fully implementing peace plan

By Associated Press, Updated: Monday, April 23, 9:12 AM

UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. political chief says the Syrian government is still using heavy weapons and has failed to fully implement the six-point peace plan which President Bashar Assad’s government approved.

B. Lynn Pascoe told the U.N. Security Council on Monday that the cease-fire remains incomplete and “human rights violations are still perpetrated with impunity.”

“We are at a pivotal moment in Syria,” Pascoe said.

Pascoe demanded the immediate withdrawal of weapons and troops from cities and towns. Thousands have been killed in more than a year of protests against the Syrian regime.

Pascoe said Syria’s compliance with other elements of the peace plan, including releasing detainees and allowing peaceful demonstrations, are “clearly insufficient.”

Pascoe said the U.N. hopes an expanded observer force will help stop the killing and create conditions for a “credible political process.”

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world.../04/23/gIQApU47bT_story.html?tid=pm_world_pop

Euro crisis, Syria diplomacy, NATO’s future: What’s at stake in French presidential vote
By Associated Press, Updated: Monday, April 23, 8:34 AM
Comments

PARIS — France’s presidential campaign has largely focused on pleasing voters at home, not the rest of the world. But whoever wins the May 6 runoff — conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy or Socialist Francois Hollande — will have a major global economy and nuclear-armed nation to run.

Here’s why the race should matter to people outside French borders:

EUROPE’S DEBT CRISIS

France has one of the world’s top 10 economies and is an engine of the eurozone, which is struggling to climb out of a debt crisis rattling markets worldwide. Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel pushed for a pact to tie European economies closer and force them to reduce their debts. Hollande wants to rethink that pact, saying it should focus more on state-sponsored growth. That could set up a collision course with Germany and European partners who have fought hard to restore confidence in the euro. Markets wobbled after Hollande won Sunday’s first round of France’s elections.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

A permanent, veto-wielding member of the U.N. Security Council, France is a player in all major world diplomatic talks. Sarkozy doesn’t hesitate to press allies in the West and the Arab world to sign on to French-led causes. Under Sarkozy, France improved relations with the U.S. and Israel, fired the first airstrikes in the international campaign against Libya’s Moammar Gadhafi and helped oust Ivory Coast’s Laurent Gbagbo last year. Sarkozy also has championed diplomatic efforts to stop the Syrian regime’s crackdown on anti-government forces. Hollande has virtually no diplomatic experience and experts predict that, if elected, he would initially focus more on European affairs than on making major commitments farther afield.

NATO AND AFGHANISTAN

France is a major contributor to the international force in Afghanistan but is eager to get out. After French troops were killed by Afghans they had trained, Sarkozy promised to speed up France’s withdrawal of its nearly 4,000 troops by the end of next year. Hollande wants to pull everyone out this year. Hollande is also unhappy with Sarkozy’s decision to bring France back into NATO’s military command after more than 40 years of a more independent policy, and he wants to cut defense budgets. A Hollande victory could significantly alter military relations with European allies and the U.S.

AND EVEN TOURISM

France’s next president inherits one of the world’s top tourist destinations, a capital of world fashion and cuisine and home to premier museums and chateaus. Will more shops be able to open Sundays? Sarkozy says yes, Hollande says maybe — and only if workers remain protected. Will sales taxes be hiked? These, too, are questions that lie in the next president’s hands.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source....
Posted for fair use....
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ND24Ak01.html

Middle East
Apr 24, 2012
US, Turkey and Iraqi Kurds join hands
By M K Bhadrakumar

There was something very odd when Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said on Friday that Turkey was becoming a "hostile state" in the region. After all, Baghdad is supposed to be the "soul" of the Arab world and Turkey is supposed to be the role model for democratized Arab nations like Iraq.

"The latest statements of [Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayip] Erdogan are another return to the process of interfering in Iraqi internal affairs and it confirms that Erdogan is still living the illusion of regional hegemony," Maliki said, adding: "It is clear that his statements have a sectarian dimension, which he used to deny before, but have now become clear, and all Iraqis reject them ... His insistence on continuing with these domestic and regional policies will damage Turkey's interests and make it a hostile state for all."

Erdogan is unused to hearing such tongue-lashing, although the immediate provocation was a remark by Erdogan himself, accusing Maliki of being "egocentric". After a close-door meeting with the visiting Iraqi Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani in Istanbul last week, Erdogan lashed out, "The current prime minister's treatment of his coalition partners, his egocentric approach in Iraqi politics ... seriously concerns Shi'ite groups, Mr Barzani and the [Sunni-backed] Iraqiya group."

On the face of it, Erdogan was merely being his usual self when he dictated to Maliki how he should rule Iraq. But The Turkish Foreign Ministry has since weighed in with a statement on Saturday confirming Erdogan spoke with deliberateness and that Ankara has definite opinions on how democracy should function in Iraq.

The statement said, "The basis of the political crisis in which Iraq finds itself is that Iraqi politicians seek to consolidate power and exclude others, rather than [follow] politics based on democratic and universal principles. It is a fact that behind the misperceptions that led to the accusations against Turkey by Prime Minister Maliki, who instigated the crisis in Iraq, this wrong understanding of politics can be found."

Axis at work
The tensions between Turkey and Iraq have been steadily building up, and of late they have sharply escalated. The "crisis in Iraq" referred to in the Turkish statement is Maliki's ongoing political battle with Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, which has taken a sectarian Shi'ite-Sunni dimension. In sum, Turkey has waded into Iraq's sectarian politics and is positioning itself on the side of the Sunnis and the Kurds.

Hashemi is currently in Istanbul and met Erdogan before the latter fired the verbal fusillade at Baghdad. But this is only one template of the plot. The fact that Hashemi arrived in Turkey on the final leg of a tour, which took him to Qatar and Saudi Arabia, gives a regional backdrop to what is unfolding. (By the way, Erdogan also just concluded a round of consultations in Riyadh and Doha.)

Indeed, Maliki has been in the Saudi and Qatari crosshairs as well. Riyadh and Doha see him as an Iranian surrogate and make no bones about their desire to have him replaced. They boycotted the recent Arab Summit in Baghdad where Maliki acted as the host.

Thus, the very same regional axis of Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar that is working for "regime change" in Syria is also on a confrontation path with Maliki - and the leitmotif is once again isolating Iran in its region.

In immediate terms, Erdogan is also smarting under the perceived slight by Tehran, which frustrated his hopes of Turkey acting as the facilitator of the talks between Iran and the "Iran Six" (also known as the P5+1, the US, Great Britain, France, Russia and China plus Germany.) Tehran administered the snub in the full glare of world publicity when it proposed Baghdad as the venue of the next round of talks with P5+1 on May 23. Erdogan's standing as the sultan of the Muslim Middle East took a lethal blow.

Interestingly, following the sharp exchange of words with Erdogan, Maliki left for Tehran on Sunday on a two-day visit. What annoys Maliki most that Erdogan has embarked upon a course of robustly strengthening ties with Kurdish leader Barzani. Ankara promotes an alliance between Barzani and Iraqi Sunni leadership with a view to challenging Maliki's leadership in Baghdad. (Turks ensured that Barzani met Hashemi in Istanbul last week.) Ankara is playing on Barzani's political ambitions as the supremo of Kurdistan, the autonomous Kurdish entity with Arbil as its capital in northern Iraq. At a press conference in Istanbul after meeting Hashemi, Barzani accused Maliki of harboring dictatorial ambitions.

The convergence of interests between Ankara and Arbil is nothing new. It dates back to the imposition of the "no-fly zone" over northern Iraq by the US, Britain and France in the early 1990s. Turkey played a key role in the emergence of Kurdistan as an autonomous region within Iraq.

Today's matrix has a strong economic dimension too: Barzani needs an outlet to the outside world for trade, especially Kurdistan's oil exports; Turkey provides it and, in turn, immensely profits out of it. The business links between the two sides are flourishing and today accounts for more than half of Turkey's US$12 billion trade with Iraq.

On another plane, Turkey is prepared to go the whole hog in promoting Barzani if only he gives a helping hand to muzzle the Kurdish insurgency in eastern Turkey, led by the separatist Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which operates out of sanctuaries in northern Iraq.

Barzani was given a red carpet welcome by the Turkish leadership, befitting a head of state. He met Turkish President Abdullah Gul, Erdogan and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davitoglu, apart from intelligence chief Hakan Fidan. Barzani has kindled fresh hopes in the Turkish mind that he would do something tangible in preventing the PKK from bleeding Turkey anymore in guerilla war waged from the territory under his control in northern Iraq.

He told the Turkish media, "You won't get anywhere with weapons. The PKK should lay down its arms. I will not let the PKK prevail in northern Iraq ... If the PKK goes ahead with weapons, it will bear the consequences." These words will come as music to the Turkish ears.

Kurdish conundrum
Ankara's dilemma, however, is that Barzani has said such fine words in the past also about cracking down on the PKK, but changed tack once he returned home to Arbil. The hard reality is that the sympathy toward PKK's cause is widespread among the Kurdish peshmerga (fighters) in northern Iraq.

But then, there could be a qualitative difference this time. For one thing, Barzani, who has keen bazaari instincts, knows that Turkey could help him and his family make an incredible amount of money through oil exports via Turkish pipelines, and second, behind Turkey stand the Saudis and Qataris, who will also be prepared to bankroll him.

From the perspective of the Saudis and Qataris, the fact that Barzani can prove to be a thorn in the flesh of Maliki makes him an object of interest. They want Maliki to be weakened to a point that he can be of no meaningful help to the beleaguered Syrian regime. (Maliki has been helping Syria critically with oil supplies and to generally break out of the western sanctions.)

Erdogan made it a point to highlight that he discussed the Syrian situation with Barzani last week. Indeed, there is a major Kurdish dimension to Turkey's Syria policy. For one thing, the specter of the revival of the old alliance between the Syrian regime and the PKK haunts Turkey. In retaliation to the heavy Turkish interference in Syrian affairs, Damascus has begun showing renewed interest in the PKK.

These are low-key moves at present but are ominous enough about what could happen if push came to a shove and Damascus finally made up its mind to pay Ankara back in the same coin. It is relatively easy for Damascus to hit back at Turkey if it takes a strategic decision to do so, because the PKK's leadership comprises Kurds of Syrian extraction and one one-third of the PKK cadres are of Syrian origin.

Conversely, in order for Turkey to step up its interference in Syria in the coming period, it needs to first minimize the scope of retaliation by Damascus. Turkey hopes that Barzani can lend a hand in reaching out to the Syrian Kurdish groups.

Another complicating factor is that Syria's Kurds, who constitute about 10% of the country's population, have been reluctant to align with the Muslim Brotherhood and other Syrian opposition groups unless their demand for an autonomous Kurdish region in eastern Syria (where Syria's oil fields lie) is conceded.

Most of Syria's Kurdish population lives in the arid region of Ayn al-Arab and in the Ifrin agricultural area bordering Turkey. Kurds also dominate large neighborhoods of Damascus and the commercial hub of Aleppo, which lies less than 50 kilometers from the Turkish border. Unsurprisingly, Kurdish autonomy within Syria will ever remain a sensitive issue for Ankara, as it could have a domino effect within Turkey itself.

But the Kurdish groups within Syria are a divided lot and it is here that Barzani comes in. The largest Kurdish umbrella group in Syria, known as the Kurdish National Congress (KNC), enjoys Barzani's backing. If KNC could be persuaded to link up with the Syrian opposition, Turkey would feel far more comfortable.

Indeed, Turkey is encouraging Barzani to convene a national Kurdish conference in Arbil in June with a view to pushing Turkey's interests both with regard to collaring the PKK, as well as encouraging Syria's Kurds to give up their present ambivalence toward "regime change" in Damascus and to decisively link up with the opposition to Assad, which is based in Turkey.

Ankara knows well enough that Barzani is a slippery customer. But what encourages the Turkish leadership is that the United States has also stepped in to ensure that Barzani delivers. The US extended an invitation to Barzani to visit Washington in early April, where President Barack Obama received him.

Taking the cue from Turkey, Washington is also catering to Barzani's bazaar instincts. A US-Kurdistan Business Council has been formed in Washington to promote US "investments" in the territories of northern Iraq under Barzani's control. ExxonMobil's chief executive officer Rex Tillerson met Barzani in Washington. (In November, Barzani awarded lucrative contracts to ExxonMobil to explore six oil fields in Kurdistan, ignoring the loud protests by Maliki's federal government that Baghdad reserves such powers to grant concessions to foreign oil companies.)

While in Washington, Barzani also met Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Deputy Secretary of State William Burns (during which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stopped by to greet him) and interacted with influential think tankers. Vice President Joe Biden hosted a "working lunch" for Barzani.

Interestingly, Barzani's tirades against Maliki took a noticeably sharp turn after his visit to Washington. He told al-Hayat, "Iraq is moving toward a catastrophe, a return to dictatorship", and that on his return to Arbil he would call a meeting of Iraqi leaders to "save" the country from Maliki and to seek "radical solutions" (read Kurdistan's secession). Barzani also declared that he wouldn't hand over Hashemi to Baghdad. (Again, at the root of Maliki's discord with Hashemi is the issue of the distribution of Iraq's oil wealth.)

Maliki's spokesman in Baghdad Ali Mussawi called Barzani's heightened rhetoric after the Washington visit as "an incomprehensible escalation." Significantly, Maliki's government has since "blacklisted" ExxonMobil. The company doesn't figure on the finalized list of 47 pre-qualified bidders for the next round of Ira's energy exploration rights in 12 new blocks in western and central Iraq, which would add a whopping 29 trillion cubic feet of gas and 10 billion barrels of oil to Iraqi reserves. The bidding is due to be held on May 30-31.

A card to play
Be that as it may, Barzani felt encouraged after his Washington visit to take to a path of strategic defiance of the federal government in Baghdad. The US extended a warm greeting to him on a scale befitting a head of state and it was heavily tinged with references to Kurdistan's independence.

Conceivably, Washington and Ankara are acting in tandem and there is close coordination of the US and Turkish policies toward Syrian and Iraqi Kurds. For both, the ultimate objective is to weaken Iran's regional influence. The Obama administration hopes that Turkey's efforts against the PKK are successful and is providing intelligence support for the military operations.

Washington also expects that under concerted pressure from multiple quarters, Maliki would finally realize what is good for him and loosen his ties with Iran and Syria. Least of all, Washington would desire that the Syrian Kurds cross over to join the opposition groups based in Turkey so that the agenda of forcing a "regime change" in Damascus gets more cutting edge.

However, there are several imponderables in the emergent scenario. Pushed against the wall, Damascus may let the Kurdish genie out of the bottle and the result could well be a Syrian version of Iraq's Kurdistan - a second autonomous Kurdish area along Turkey's borders. That could in turn induce Turkish Kurds also to seek similar autonomy. The best course for Erdogan would have been to make progress toward a political solution to Turkey's Kurdish problem as he had been doing. But the pre-requisite for that would be a return of "normalcy" in Turkey's ties with Syria and a more stable Iraq.

Arguably, Erdogan is on a slippery path. His acrimonious exchange with Maliki underscores that Turkey's isolation is almost complete in its immediate neighborhood. The weakest link in the Turkish strategy is Barzani himself.

Ankara heavily depends on Barzani to broker deals with the PKK as well as to finesse the Syrian Kurds. True, Barzani has a vested interest in working with Ankara since Iraq's Kurdistan has developed extensive economic links with Turkey and these ties are deepening by the day. But Barzani has his limitations, too.

Everything hinges on his capacity to harness Kurdish nationalism scattered across not only Turkey, Iran and Syria but also Iran, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Lebanon and to convince them that their only realistic hope is to seek increased autonomy within existing state structures on the lines he has secured with American support. That's a tall order. Whether the Kurdish militants will be persuaded to put down their guns and follow Barzani's footsteps remains in serious doubt.

Barzani is a controversial figure himself among the Kurds. Essentially, he is a tribal warlord who uses coercive methods, often very violent methods, to keep his family on top of the heap of Iraqi Kurdistan and his family exercises personal control over the region's land, property, resources and finances. Put plainly, he and his family run a business cartel called "Kurdistan". Kurds increasingly resent that they are being treated as his tenants and serfs.

Barzani's patronage system is predicated on his practice of treating the budget and revenues from Kurdistan's oil and gas as his family's private accounts with no real financial control or accountability. This patronage system is overwhelmingly based on clan rule and it may run only so long as there is no rule of law, but then, Iraq's democratization is spreading its virus into the Kurdistan as well and educated Kurds are beginning to resent the Barzani clan's autocratic lifestyle.

For instance, the 'oil contracts' signed by the Turkish, American, British and other foreign companies are going to be the principal instruments for Ankara and Washington to influence Barzani, while no one has a clue as to what these 'contracts' are about, how they were negotiated or where the money comes and goes. To be sure, Barzani has extensive business interests in Turkey, the US and several European countries.

All said, the bankruptcy of the US policy today is such that it made heavy sacrifices in human lives and resources to remold Iraq as a democratic country and, arguably, the one signal success it had would be the democratization of Iraq. Despite all the aberrations of the Iraqi system, the country enjoys a degree of representative rule, which is an exception rater than the rule in the Muslim Middle East. Now, in a curious twist, Washington is propping up Barzani in order to realign Iraqi political scene to suit its geopolitical interests, completely overlooking his veal track record.

Obama is literally taking a leaf out of Henry Kissinger's monumental cynicism and duplicity toward Iraq's Kurds - pampering their national aspirations as part of a ruthless, deceitful process to destabilize the regime in Baghdad but all the while not wanting their protegees to win their struggle because it could be too disruptive for the entire region, especially for the US's closest ally, Turkey. Barzani has always been, historically speaking, "a card to play" and even by the yardstick of covert operations Obama and Erdogan are locked in a cynical enterprise.

Kissinger, at least, was forthright. Looking back at the US's sellout of Kurds in Iraq in 1975, Kissinger commented, "Covert action should not be confused with missionary work." Obama would probably agree here, but his crucial difference is that Erdogan has showed him how dalliance with the Kurds can also be made self-financing and put on cost-accounting principles, an angle that always fascinates Obama in these hard times.

In short, while Kissinger was immersed in realpolitik, Obama also makes sure American companies do some profitable business in Kurdistan's fabulous oil fields so that the US is sure to be in a "win-win" situation no matter the trajectory of democracy in Iraq or the longevity of the regime in Damascus.

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.

Copyright 2012 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved.

Related Articles:

Turkey: the odd man in (Apr 20, '12)

Turkey learns rules of the game in Iraq
(Apr 1, '11)
 

momof23goats

Deceased
well I think the ole gal sang her son and is now leaving the stage, so many different ways this could go off for sure.
thanks Dutch and HouseCArl, I got to tell you, you guys sure to put the media to shame. i always get my news here.
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
well I think the ole gal sang her son and is now leaving the stage, so many different ways this could go off for sure.
thanks Dutch and HouseCArl, I got to tell you, you guys sure to put the media to shame. i always get my news here.

^^^+1,000^^^ Thanks, Gentlemen!!! Stay safe and well- we NEED you!!!

OA, out...
 
=






Jimmy Carter warns against war with Iran

By Agence France-Presse
Monday, April 23, 2012 18:48 EDT
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/23/jimmy-carter-warns-against-war-with-iran/

CHICAGO — Former US President Jimmy Carter warned against a possible war with Iran Monday as he decried his nation’s involvement in unjust conflicts at a summit of Nobel Peace Prize laureates in Chicago.

Carter, a naval veteran who served as Democratic president from 1977 to 1981, said that while he is “not against conflict when necessary,” the criteria for a just war are often not met.


War is only just when it is a “last resort” after “every other possible peaceful resolution” is exhausted, when all efforts are made to protect civilians, when the purpose of the conflict is to make the situation better, not worse, when society in general agrees it is just and when the level of violence is “proportional to the injury received,” he said.

“That would obviously exclude our recent policy of preemptive war,” Carter said in a keynote address.

The United States has been “almost constantly at war” in the past 60 years — in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, El Salvador, Libya, Panama, Haiti, Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan and many others.

“And now we are contemplating going to war again perhaps in Iran,” said the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Most of those wars fail to meet the criteria for a just war and “some of them were completely unnecessary.”

Carter said he wished the United States could be seen as a champion of peace, an environmental leader, and the world’s most generous nation when it comes to feeding the hungry and opposing human rights abuses.

“That’s not a hopeless dream,” Carter said.

“Maybe for my generation, yes, maybe for my children’s generation yes, but not for my grandchildren and students who are looking at Nobel laureates and saying what can I do to make this world more peaceful and make sure that all aspects of human rights prevail.”

Carter, who suffered from a perception of weakness that culminated in the botched 1980 operation to resolve the Iranian hostage crisis, is among 20 laureates gathered in Chicago for a world summit of Nobel Peace Prize winners.

Agence France-Presse





=
 
=







Kim Jong-un launches venomous verbal
assault on South Korean president


PAUL KORING WASHINGTON
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Apr. 23, 2012 7:52AM EDT

Last updated Monday, Apr. 23, 2012 9:13PM EDT
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ult-on-south-korean-president/article2410777/

Like father, like son.

Following the embarrassingly public failure of its latest long-range missile firing – posing as a satellite launch to strut North Korea as space-faring nation – the young, still-untested North Korea dictator Kim Jong-un resorted to his father’s and grandfather’s favoured tactic.

On Monday, in an unusually venomous and personal strike, South Korea’s President Lee Myung Bak was denounced as “human scum” and a Korean traitor.


Evidently, the new dictator took special offence to President Lee’s barbed suggestion that instead of $850-million on a vainglorious rocket, Pyongyang should be buying corn to save North Korea’s starving millions.

The failed rocket was intended as the highlight of elaborate, expensive and carefully-staged celebrations marking what would have been the 100th birthday of North Korea’s founder – and the current leader’s grandfather – Kim Il Sung.

The South Korean leader was excoriated, on state television and by the official Korean Central News Agency, for having “so malignantly desecrated this significant holiday” in a furious blow-back.

Vowing it did “not make an empty talk,” Pyongyang threatened a “fire of retaliation” to turn South Korea’s “rat-like groups to ashes in three or four minutes by unprecedented peculiar means and methods of our own style.”

Monday’s withering barrage of denunciations was especially nasty, perhaps reflecting dynastic sensitivity.

Nearly two decades after his death, the “Eternal President” remains revered as the leading figure in the fevered personality cult that underpins North Korea’s dictatorship. Evoking the lineage of the “Eternal President” and the also deceased, but perpetually Supreme Leader Kim Jong-il, is part of the current effort to establish the largely unknown Kim Jong-un.

The one-time schoolboy at a posh Swiss academy is now showered with titles, saluted by legions of goose-stepping troops, and feted with flowers from adoring children. It’s all part of his elevation to supreme authority and amid the founder’s birthday celebrations.

Chilling and bizarre, the latest threats came as tensions again escalated on the Korean peninsula.

Hopes that the 20-something Kim Jong-un might usher in a new era – after more than a half-century of war, repression, and starvation in the world’s last outpost of neo-Stalinism – are fading.

The fizzled Friday 13th attempt to loft a missile capable of packing a nuclear warhead – if North Korea ever manages to miniaturize its crude atomic weapons – was followed by United Nations condemnation and broad international disapproval.

Pyongyang also tore up a Feb. 29 agreement with Washington that had led some to hope for a new era of international co-operation. That pact pledged an end to missile and nuclear-weapons testing in exchange for a resumption of U.S. food shipments. “Since the U.S. violated the Feb. 29 agreement with its undisguised hostile acts, we will no longer be bound to it,” Pyongyang said after Washington denounced the rocket launch.

Meanwhile, China, North Korea’s only ally, pointedly backed the Pyongyang regime Monday, after chiding it for the defiant missile-test 10 days ago.

“The traditional friendship between China and North Korea was personally created and nurtured by our two parties’ and countries’ former generation of revolutionaries, and is our precious common treasure,” Chinese President Hu Jintao said, according to the official Xinhua news agency.

Tirades and threats often follow moments of North Korean humiliation or failure. More rarely, but more worrisome, is that Pyongyang sometimes opts for high explosive instead of high invective.

In late 2010, North Korea artillery fired salvos of high-explosive shells at Yeonpyeong, a South Korean island close to the disputed maritime boundary. At least two soldiers were killed and scores of houses were set ablaze. Fire was returned, and warplanes scrambled in what was one of the most serious incidents since the 1953 ceasefire that left the two states technically still at war.

In March 2010, a North Korean warship torpedoed and sank a South Korean warship called the Cheonan in the Yellow Sea. Nearly half of the 104 sailors on board were killed.

Although Pyongyang vehemently denied involvement, a multinational probe concluded a North Korean midget submarine had covertly attacked the Cheonan.






=
 
Top